Many construction projects require a ditch or swale. As is well known, these ditches are often required to contain water runoff. This run-off often carries sediment or the like which must be controlled.
Accordingly, the art contains several inventions intended to control such sediment and erosion associated therewith. Examples of such inventions include hay bales, rock ditch checks, and fences. The fences include end-adjacent panels which, in some forms, are anchored to the ground in the ditch by stakes, and in other forms are anchored to the ground by burying part of the panel.
While somewhat successful, these prior art ditch checks have several drawbacks. For example, some of the prior art ditch checks include panels which are difficult to store, transport and set up because they are bulky and must be precisely manipulated and set up. Some of the prior art ditch checks require high maintenance and are thus costly.
Therefore, there is need for a ditch check that is easily and efficiently stored, transported and set up and requires only a minimum amount of maintenance.
Further, since not all terrain is even, a ditch check should be amenable to being efficiently customized for a particular terrain. Many prior art ditch checks include stiff panels that are not at all amenable to such customizing to accurately fit a particular terrain. This may lead to costly construction efforts.
Therefore, there is a need for a ditch check that can be efficiently customized to fit the particular terrain.
Yet another drawback to many know ditch checks is the inability to aid revegitation. A monolithic concrete panel is an example of such a prior art ditch check that makes revegitation difficult.
Therefore, there is need for a ditch check that can promote revegitation.
Since it is difficult to accurately predict the amount of water that will be flowing through a ditch, a ditch check should be amenable to accommodating a wide range of water flow rates. However, many prior art ditch checks have fixed openings which can not accommodate flow rates above a limited velocity. Simply making flow paths through the ditch check larger is not the answer since larger openings will not trap the sediment required for the ditch check.
Therefore, there is need for a ditch check that can efficiently accommodate a large range of flow rates while still trapping the sediment required for the ditch check.
Still further, the flow paths through many of the prior art ditch checks are easily clogged but difficult to clean. A flow passage through a concrete panel can become plugged and may be difficult to clean.
Therefore, there is need for a ditch check that can be efficiently cleaned.
For a variety of reasons, including some of the above-discussed drawbacks, many prior art ditch checks are not reusable. Thus, once set up, such ditch checks must be discarded when their usefulness has expired. This is not as economical as could be desired.
Therefore, there is need for a ditch check that can be reused.
Still further, some ditch checks have portions thereof that dislodge and/or wash away. When flowing water hits a check, it creates an eddy. The eddy scours the soil immediately upstream from the erosion control device which then undercuts the elements associated with the erosion control device, allowing he water to flow beneath the check. The flowing water can also remove the earth holding elements supporting the ditch check thereby creating a possibility of dislodging the entire device.
Therefore, there is a need for a ditch check that is not unduly subject to water bypassing the check or dislodging support elements of the check.